• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

General conceptual question for any and all

Which person is correct in the 2 scenarios - X or Y?


  • Total voters
    2

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
It matters a lot if you are making an argument that you cannot get from one to the other within given parameters without disclosing one of them.

Still point A is point A and point B is point B
 

tas8831

Well-Known Member
Still point A is point A and point B is point B
Still don't know where point A is.

If the guy knows where point A is but won't say, the outcome is the same. Without being told or knowing where point A is, one CANNOT say whether or not one can get to point B by only travelling X distance.

Not sure why this is so difficult.
 

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
Still don't know where point A is.

If the guy knows where point A is but won't say, the outcome is the same. Without being told or knowing where point A is, one CANNOT say whether or not one can get to point B by only travelling X distance.

Not sure why this is so difficult.


It does not matter where point A or point B is, where ever they are there is a distance between them.

Adding a person only makes it subjective, hiding point does not change the location of the point

Not sure why basic geometry is so difficult.
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
Still don't know where point A is.

If the guy knows where point A is but won't say, the outcome is the same. Without being told or knowing where point A is, one CANNOT say whether or not one can get to point B by only travelling X distance.

Not sure why this is so difficult.
One reason why it's difficult for me: when someone describes someone else's argument as irrational, one question that I always want to answer for myself is whether the person is describing the argument accurately or they misunderstood the argument in some way.

This anonymous Person X's argument as you understand it is irrational. Was it actually irrational or did you just mishear it or miss some nuance? I'm not sure how to tell.
 

tas8831

Well-Known Member
One reason why it's difficult for me: when someone describes someone else's argument as irrational, one question that I always want to answer for myself is whether the person is describing the argument accurately or they misunderstood the argument in some way.

This anonymous Person X's argument as you understand it is irrational. Was it actually irrational or did you just mishear it or miss some nuance? I'm not sure how to tell.
Evidence For And Against Evolution:

The argument is based on 2 premises

1 that even assuming optimal circumstances at most humans could have accumulated a few thausand positive mutations (say 500,000 assuming the best scenario) after they diverged from the LCA 5M years ago

2 that 500,000 benefitial mutations are not enough to explain the differences between chimps and humans



From that, I concocted my scenarios, just to 'take a pulse.'
Pedants missed the forest.
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
Evidence For And Against Evolution:

The argument is based on 2 premises

1 that even assuming optimal circumstances at most humans could have accumulated a few thausand positive mutations (say 500,000 assuming the best scenario) after they diverged from the LCA 5M years ago

2 that 500,000 benefitial mutations are not enough to explain the differences between chimps and humans
What's irrational about that?

I think the premises are probably incorrect (or at least wrong-headed), but if you take them as a given, you can make inferences from them.

From that, I concocted my scenarios, just to 'take a pulse.'
Pedants missed the forest.
Don't blame us for your failure to express yourself properly.

And having seen that quote, I do think that my suspicion was correct: I think you've misunderstood what was told to you. What you gave in the OP wasn't a fair analogy for the argument you say it represents.
 

tas8831

Well-Known Member
What's irrational about that?

LOL!

The pedant rants. I'm guessing you only read what I quoted.

I had asked:
1. What traits the human-chimp ancestor had in the first place [i.e., what is point A]
2. how many mutations would have been needed in order to get a distinctly human trait - say, upper limb proportion - from the LCA of humans and chimps [i.e., how far from A to B]
2a. How you discovered what the ancestral state was, seeing as we do not know what the exact ancestral taxon was
2b. how you determined the number of beneficial mutations needed to produce that change
etc..​

then later explained:

If your position is that some number of fixed beneficial mutations is not enough to explain human evolution from an apelike ancestor, you HAVE TO HAVE answers to those questions, otherwise, you are just spewing nonsense.​


I think the premises are probably incorrect (or at least wrong-headed), but if you take them as a given, you can make inferences from them.

Yes - I inferred that the creationist did not understand enough re: the topic that he could not understand why I was asking what I had been. Without answers to the questions I posed, one CANNOT say 'x mutations are too few', or 'there is not enough time for evolution from A to B'.

Don't blame us for your failure to express yourself properly.
I'm guessing you don't have much of a biology background?
And having seen that quote, I do think that my suspicion was correct: I think you've misunderstood what was told to you. What you gave in the OP wasn't a fair analogy for the argument you say it represents.
LOL!

Well then, master of all, explain what was told to me.

I'm sure it will be entertaining.
 
Last edited:
Top